Annals of Medicine and Surgery 5 Supplement 1 (2016) S41
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Annals of Medicine and Surgery journal homepage: www.annalsjournal.com
Peer review report
Peer review report 2 on “A quality improvement project using a ward round proforma based on the SOAP acronym to improve documentation in surgical receiving” Original submission Recommendation Minor revision. Comments to the author Dear Authors, I do have some minor comments that I think can improve it: 1. There is no mention of what the time frame was between the imposed change and re-measurement. 2. It is challenging to judge the merit of the study without any patient outcomes noted before and after. Did this for example speed up discharge rates due to increased efficiency? or did it slow down discharge as the clinicians now became aware of
DOI of published article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2015.11.011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2016.01.033 2049-0801
symptoms and signs they would have otherwise missed. Did the complication rates change? this point here is crucial in giving the project. 3. “Most staff found it a good idea” It would be worth expanding to evaluate exactly what the staff percentage of keeping this pro forma was. 4 What would the adherence be if you ran another week cycle blinded? this is also very important. If you can answer points 1,3 and one of 2 or 4 I would be happy to accept. Youssuf Saleh, Medical Student Imperial College, School of Medicine, Exhibition Road, South Kensington, London, SW72AZ, United Kingdom E-mail addresses:
[email protected],
[email protected].
